Atheist Tuesday: More Sound and Fury

43 CommentsAtheist Tuesday

Atheists continue to rag on, rant over, and ridicule my videos on—guess what?—atheism. Here are more random specific samplings of articulate atheism at its finest selected from another set of poignant YouTube videos I’ve posted over the past year. (See Sound and Fury, Part 1 here.)

In response to my video, The Joker Interviewed:

From Brovocop: You Christians are stupid and need to die.
juggalojack13: Christians = Failzors

azmanabdula: my friend ……..the pin worm….will also enter heaven……as long as he believes in christ….LMAO…..pinworms in heaven……..

In response to another interview
I had with Ray Comfort called
Ray Comfort’s New Hair-Brained Ideas:

ybcool: Ray expletive strikes again!! lol His efforts are SO futile it’s ridiculously funny! Lie down and make yourself at home, expletive! We Atheists need a Rug to wipe our feet on! 😉

Question: Why are these unbelievers so angry and inarticulate? Is it fair to post these comments as representative of unbelief as a whole? Is this what happens when someone is not accountable to God? Me thinks so.

CLICK HERE FOR PART 3!

Here is a comment from a past post. How would you answer this atheist? Does he have a valid point?

Hi Steve–

I find your videos with people standing on busy intersections really strange.

To me at least, if I were a pedestrian waiting at a busy intersection for a light to change while somebody was barking a sermon into my ear with a MEGAPHONE, I can pretty much guarantee that as I walked away with ears ringing, I wouldn’t be thinking “Gee! I need to get right with God, so I can spend eternity with THAT guy!”

I’m an atheist. People like you generate people like me.

—Captain Howdy

Comments (43)

  1. Garrett

    Reply

    The funny part is that you have to dredge YouTube to slander us. On your blog we’re a fairly articulate bunch.

    It also wrecks your question: no, you can’t use a small sampling of comments to represent a group of people. We’re a diverse group of many backgrounds.

    You also presume these people are angry when most of them aren’t. You want boogie men to rally against.

    • Steve Sanchez

      Reply

      Garrett,

      It’s not slander. In a few weeks I will prove that to you, but you will have to be patient. I am sloooowly building to a crescendo; trust me, you will not be disappointed. In the meantime, feel free to pooh-pooh my conclusions. And by the way, a lot of your posts sound very angry….

  2. Garrett

    Reply

    You won’t. You even admit to us your arguments are “weak and feeble.” If it’s more YouTube comments, then who cares? YouTube is known for terrible comments. Gonna quote the Bible and then let the quote flop about with anything to verify the source? Maybe you will pull a new trick, but you will not convince that atheists are angry and inarticulate because I spend loads more time with atheists than you. Oh, and maybe because I am an atheist that doesn’t type like a teenager texting nor resorts to threats of violence.

    Atheists are atheists. They are not all articulate, angry, nice or whatever. The same goes for Christians (regardless of how many times you No True Scotsman the facts!).

    I don’t get angry at you. You do annoy me, especially when you censor my comments because it’s something you aren’t allowed to say. I’ll follow your rules, but that doesn’t make them reasonable.

    Other than that, you’re mostly funny unless you’re trying to justify bigotry like last Tuesday’s article. Things that can hurt people upset me, such as people saying Christians, Steve. That too, makes me angry. Brute force is not what makes us such a fascinating and successful species. We’re a better breed of animals than that.

  3. vintango2k

    Reply

    Hehehe I think Garrett is your foil Steve, and while he seems angry with your posts, I’d hardly call him a flame poster like the kind of folks you’re posting on your main page. You find these people all over the internet and they post hateful comments on all sorts of subjects, its nothing to cry persecution over Steve.

  4. perdita

    Reply

    “Is it fair to post these comments as representative of unbelief as a whole? Is this what happens when someone is not accountable to God? Me thinks so.”

    Steve, of course you think so. But you have a history of ignoring evidence against your position and accepting only evidence that supports your position. You can do that. This is a free country. But understand, this faulty reasoning is why I cannot trust your judgment. Once we take off those blinders and see that these sort of trolling comments come from believers as well as unbelievers and, furthermore, that believers and unbelievers can also be quite well-mannered and articulate, we realize that the difference is not ‘being accountable to God’. The difference is one of maturity and thoughtfulness of the individual posters.

    “Here is a comment from a past post. How would you answer this atheist? Does he have a valid point?”

    I can’t see what Captain Howdy’s comment has to do with the rest of the post.

    “It’s not slander.”

    That’s right. If it’s written, it’s libel. 🙂

    What you are doing, Steve, is ignoring the atheists that post here in preference to the trolling comments on YouTube. I can see why. The trolling comments are easier to deal with – easier to discount.

    “And by the way, a lot of your posts sound very angry….”

    Well, yes. You’re telling your fellow Christians that the unbelievers who post here can be ignored, that we’re really, really just a bunch of angry, foul-mouthed trolls. Why would I not be insulted? Why would I not be upset at this mischaracterization?

    I’m curious about how you’ll end this series, because right now it looks like you’re maligning a group of people based on prejudice and encouraging believers to think of atheists as ‘the Other’ , as a faceless group and not as individuals, and as something less than human.

  5. Nohm

    Reply

    “Why are these unbelievers so angry and inarticulate?”

    Because your “specific samplings” focus on teenager comments. Which is what you get on YouTube. Steve, no one is going to be impressed that you found foul-mouthed inarticulate comments on YouTube, of all places.

    What’s next? Are you going to complain about the lack of poetry in gangsta rap?

    “Is it fair to post these comments as representative of unbelief as a whole?”

    No, not at all. Just as posting GG Allin lyrics is not representative of “punk rock” lyrics as a whole.

    Just as posting Fred Phelps’ rantings is not representative of Christians as a whole.

    “Is this what happens when someone is not accountable to God?”

    No. This is what happens when you go looking for naughty comments on YouTube, and count your hits while ignoring the misses.

  6. Nohm

    Reply

    I’ll note that you’ve said a few times before that I am articulate and good-natured.

    So, why aren’t you bringing me up, instead of these YouTube kids?

  7. BathTub

    Reply

    First of all you have no way of knowing if an individual is an Atheist.

    That’s your mind reading at work again.

    As mentioned before it would take me 5 seconds to start collecting hateful statements from self professed Christians. But as you already said before ‘oh well then they aren’t True Christians™’. Just as it would take me 5 seconds to find Christians that have declared Ray and his acolytes Heretics. I know of at least one church that included his books in a book burning.

    And again as many people have pointed out to you ‘It’s the Internet, and YouTube especially’, Penny Arcade have an excellent cartoon on this called “Green Blackboards (And Other Anomalies)”. Check it out, I won’t link to it because it has a naughty word.

    Christians are people, Atheists are people. People can be Douche-bags.

    I’m sure we can all imagine that you’ve saved some nice piece of abuse up for next week.

    Of course if it was ridiculously common you wouldn’t have to save it up either…

    “Cool Persecution Bro!”

  8. vintango2k

    Reply

    I am a little disappointed Steve that you’d waste time giving creendence to people who flame your posts when you could be addressing things more topical like evolution, the goodness of God, creation, creation science, etc. etc. I’d be interested to see you discuss the ‘truth’ of Genesis and the evidence of its existence.

  9. Mark

    Reply

    Steve, several of the commenters have already debunked your suggestion that selected Youtube comments represent the 15 million atheists living in America. (Perdita, if you’re reading, I’ve always enjoyed your comments. Please don’t stop). So i have nothing to add there.

    But I would like to ask you the question that is close to your heart. The question is; why do Christians know the Bible so poorly?

    I noticed in your speech to the Joker that you quoted from the Ten Commandments. but strictly speaking, lying are stealing aren’t mentioned in the Ten Commandment. there are three versions of the Ten Commandments, in Exodus 20, Exodus 34 and Deuteronomy 5 (i.e. the versions adopted respectively by protestants, Catholics and Jews). But the version that is specifically called the Ten Commandments is Exodus 34, which has such useful suggestion as “Don’t cook a goat in it’s mother’s milk”. Thanks for clearing that up, God!

    So the next time you see the Joker, be sure to be scripturally correct and say “according to the unnumbered and obscure 50+ rules in Exodus 20 to 24, your’re a sinner”. It may not have the same kick, but it’s more accurate.

    Just as a side-note, I was at a pub trivia night with my work colleagues recently. The question came up “What was Judas’ reward for betraying Jesus?”, and we all looked at a colleague who goes to weekly Bible study sessions. But she was stumped. I supplied the answer “30 days of silver”, and she, knowing I was an atheist, couldn’t beleive I knew it and she didn’t. I was too kind to tell her that true study requires scepticism, otherwise it’s simply indoctrination.

  10. Bizzle

    Reply

    “What’s next? Are you going to complain about the lack of poetry in gangsta rap?”

    That’s hilarious! Thanks for giving me a laugh.

  11. Angela

    Reply

    Mark … that is “shekels” or pieces of silver, not “days”. That is what he was paid, but Judas paid for his betrayal with his life … his immediate physical life and his eternal life.

    • Steve Sanchez

      Reply

      Angela,

      Great answer. Our atheist friends need to study their Bible a bit more so that they may correct us more effectively. Either that, or join us!

  12. Mark

    Reply

    Days was a mistype, as was misspelling believe. It’s a rather obvious misstype too, because there’s no such thing as a “day of silver”.

    But I think you’re ducking the main question that I put forward. The question was, why do you use Exodus 20 as the source of the Ten Commandments instead of Exodus 34 or Deuteronomy 5?

  14. Nameless Cynic

    Reply

    Angela,

    Very nice. Meanwhile, did Judas take the money, or throw it at their feet? And did he hang himself, or trip on a stump and split open like a burst tick?

    The jury still seems to be out on those questions.

  15. Steve Sanchez

    Reply

  17. Garrett

    Reply

    Seriously Steve: we don’t all live in California. All I know is that Prop 19 failed to pass because it was a somewhat high-profile vote.

  18. Nohm

    Reply

    Steve,

    I live in California, and I honestly don’t know which vote you’re talking about. This isn’t a “gotcha” thing… I seriously don’t know which vote you’re talking about.

  19. Nohm

    Reply

    I’m racking my brain thinking of pro-fundamentalist things that might have gotten voted down, or pro-Satan things that have been voted up, and I honestly come up with a blank.

  22. Nameless Cynic

    Reply

    Gee, Steve. Who would have imagined that you’d give a simplistic reading to a complicated election cycle.

    It is as it always has been: the party in power always loses on the midterms. Always. There are a number of reasons for this, but it is an invariable truth.

    Here. A slightly more detailed analysis than that.

  23. Nohm

    Reply

    “The fact that nearly the whole country voted RED and California did the exact opposite.”

    As opposed to… when, exactly?

  25. Nohm

    Reply

    So, Republicans think that California voters are stupid for not voting Republican.

    Shocked, I am.

    Is this supposed to be surprising?

    Very… eh, interesting use of statistics in that article.

    (For the record, I’m not a Democrat.)

  26. Nohm

    Reply

    In addition, I did have a nice chuckle when the article referred to Carly Fiorina as a “moderate Republican”. Good laughs, there.

  27. perdita

    Reply

    “The implication is that a whole lot of them, apparently, didn’t know what the issues were.”

    You know, that’s what the losing side always says.

  28. Nohm

    Reply

    Steve wrote:

    “I don’t think they were saying that the voters were stupid. The implication is that a whole lot of them, apparently, didn’t know what the issues were.”

    Really? Then how did you read this:

    “Even as voters in other states said they’d had enough of ever bigger, more intrusive and higher-cost government by the Democrats, California voters said, “More please.””

    That certainly doesn’t imply that they didn’t know what the issues were. In fact, it implies that they consciously made the decision to have bigger, more intrusive and higher-cost government.

    But, I’ll change my wording: Republicans think that California voters made the wrong choice to not vote Republican.

    Again, how is this supposed to be news-worthy? Did you know that Democrats think that Nebraska voters made the wrong choice to not vote Democrat? True story, Steve.

    Why is anyone surprised that a state that has voted Democrat for the last 50 years would do so again?

    Don’t worry, I actually know the answer to this question.

    And, in the last URL you supplied (and yes, “not-too-subtle” is correct), the guy wrote:

    “California is split into two states politically. The coastal areas tend to vote morally liberal and for Democrats; the inland areas tend to vote conservative and for Republicans.”

    Was he dropped as a baby? Does he honestly see this as surprising? Does he seriously not understand why this is?

    As you can guess, though, my favorite part was this:

    “As for the 8-million-some California voters, I split them into thirds. I see one-third of Californians as wicked and unreasonable and ignorant, see another third as moral and reasonable and knowledgeable, and see still another third as somewhat moral and reasonable but ignorant. Usually on statewide ballot measures, there are always one-third reliably liberal and one-third reliably conservative, and the remaining one-third decides who wins or loses statewide on Election Day.”

    Well, I’m convinced! 😉

    You know what? I see nearly all California voters as people, and I see Randy Thomasson as a dirty meanie piggy-head! Nyah nyah!!

    Oh my gosh, I almost missed this gem:

    “Most pastors don’t instruct on Biblical standards for voting or make sure everyone receives a Christian-value voter guide. They are too distracted or ignorant or fearful of applying the Bible to public policy”

    scoffscoffscoffscoff.

    Uh, yeah… wonder why they don’t. Hmmm.

    Steve, what’s your opinion on Randy’s article? You say it’s “interesting”, but that could mean one of a hundred different things.

  29. Nohm

    Reply

    Steve, as an additional question to you, why do YOU think this is the case:

    “California is split into two states politically. The coastal areas tend to vote morally liberal and for Democrats; the inland areas tend to vote conservative and for Republicans.”

    I completely agree that the statement is accurate. What I find strange is that there’s no indication that he understands why this is the case. Do you know why?

    (Hint: There’s something else that make coastal CA and inland CA different, besides the weather.)

  33. wretchedrandy

    Reply

    Mark you said-But I think you’re ducking the main question that I put forward. The question was, why do you use Exodus 20 as the source of the Ten Commandments instead of Exodus 34 or Deuteronomy 5?

    Why is it so hard for you to see?? All of the Bible is God’s word. From what section of the Bible we choose to use them from really makes no difference the fact remains the same. God has given them to us to make it know to us that His standard is perfection. That one of the reason that you see them mentioned so much. He is trying to get the point across that He is Holy and we aren’t. You can find any reason you like to reject, deny, mock, explain way but it is all simply a rebellious attitude toward God and You will still be held accountable regardless. People like Steve and Ray comfort are simply trying to get all of you to open your eyes and see because we all do care.

  34. vintango2k

    Reply

    The coastal areas are where the major metro areas of California are, since Steve and Nohm are in a stare down I figure I’d take a shot at it. People in big cities tend to be more liberal because of exposure to different cultures, ideas, and people. When you actually interact with people and listen to their points of view you gain knowledge and understanding, and can even change your opinions on things and preconceptions about a certain people, way of life, or culture. Morgan Spurlock used to have a show called 30 days where he’d take people out of their normal environment and place them in a totally different setting/ culture for 30 days. The effect was usually always enlightening, as in the case of one episode where a midwestern conservative man was taken to San Francisco to room mate with a gay man and learn about them for 30 days. The show chronicled how he started out in a small town where he and everyone else had conservative preconceptions about what it would be like compared to how it actually was and by the end of the show he learned a lot about a different lifestyle and culture then his own. In other words, he became enlightened and maybe just a little wiser as a result.

  35. Garrett

    Reply

    Why is that God’s standard? Is he accountable to someone else? It’s an unreasonable standard and it makes no sense for such harsh punishments to be doled out. Unless God is some kind of a monster with no self-control.

  36. vintango2k

    Reply

    Indeed, Garrett why is our standard lesser then God’s? I mean if the punishment for lying, stealing, adultry, killing, and idoltry is to burn forever for all eternity in a place of endless, darkness, torture and death then why should we act with any compassion and simply imprison for a decided period of time, those people who violate those laws on Earth? We put murderers to death in some situations, why not put them all to death? If God is going to judge them guilty anyways and hurl them into a lake of fire, why not make the punishment here on Earth for stealing, adultry, and lying, death as well? Who knows maybe faced with an actual death sentence people might repent and turn to God and ask for forgiveness for their sins? Wouldn’t that be wonderful?

  37. Juggalojack13

    Reply

    Lol I’m not an atheist, I have my own system of beliefs. But thanks for featuring my comment. 😀 Means alot, bro.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *